Abstract
THE segregation of determined, yet undifferentiated, cells in aggregates consisting of cells from various vertebrate embryonic structures represents a high degree of specificity in cellular recognition1–3. Steinberg's differential adhesiveness model2 has been particularly successful in accounting for this sorting out of cells in terms of differences in their adhesiveness. Although arranged in monolayers, insect epidermal cells seem to behave similarly when their normal spatial organisation is disrupted. The regrouping of disaggregated Drosophila imaginal disk cells according to epidermal type and the failure of grafts from one epidermis to form stable contacts with cells of another epidermal tissue have both been attributed to sorting out of unlike cells4,5. Yet some insect epidermal cell types fail to segregate completely from one another; even when disaggregated and mixed, cells from genetically marked leg and antenna disks are known to form some integrated patterns6. It is possible that different degrees of adhesiveness exist for various combinations of two different epidermal types, the adhesive properties not being uniquely specified for each tissue. With this possibility in mind, exchanges between grafts and hosts of various pupal epithelia of the moth, Manduca sexta, were performed. The affinity relationships observed reflected the existence of covert cell surface differences in these epidermal populations whose component cells at the time of grafting are determined but undifferentiated. The findings suggest that the cell surface properties are not tissue type specific but are shared to various degrees by the different epidermal tissues.
This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution
Access options
Subscribe to this journal
Receive 51 print issues and online access
$199.00 per year
only $3.90 per issue
Buy this article
- Purchase on SpringerLink
- Instant access to the full article PDF.
USD 39.95
Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Holtfreter, J. J. exp. Zool. 94, 261–318 (1943).
Steinberg, M. S. Science 141, 401–408 (1963).
Trinkaus, J. P. Cells into Organs, 100–125 (Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, 1969).
Nöthiger, R. Wilhelm Roux Archiv. 155, 269–301 (1964).
Lawrence, P. A. in Developmental Systems. Insects (eds Waddington, C. H. & Counce, S. J.) 157–209 (Academic, New York, 1973).
Garcia-Bellido, A. Genetics 59, 487–499 (1968).
Nardi, J. B. & Kafatos, F. C. J. Embryol. exp. Morph. 36, 469–512 (1976).
Kauffman, S. A. Science 181, 310–318 (1973); Ciba Fdn Symp. 29, 201–221 (1975).
Garcia-Bellido, A. Ciba Fdn Symp. 29, 161–182 (1975).
Morata, G. & Lawrence, P. A. Nature 255, 614–617 (1975).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
NARDI, J. Are cell affinity relationships for insect epidermal tissues evidence for combinatorial control?. Nature 268, 665–667 (1977). https://doi.org/10.1038/268665a0
Received:
Accepted:
Issue date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/268665a0


